Hanoi5

Well, that is not exactly true. After ♣A lead and the right return by South the contract can still be defeated.

I think it depends on agreement what partner would play with KQ or AK in spades in second position (if he were to play a honor instead of a small one). I believe the standard is to play the highest card. I'm playing ♥K but I'm usually lost in this sort of problem. Even at the table. (inb4LOL) Edit: I just saw the hands...

Yeah 4♥ is probably 25% maybe more? Not good at all. I was gonna suggest opening 4♥ but being Vulnerable 3♥ is probably better.

How dare you put teachers in that group? And how dare you be so pathetic, are you one of those who'd take the bail-out money for $1.000.000 bonuses? That sort of capitalism is what is driving the US (and the world) to the ground, will you keep up with that attitude? Haven't you learnt your lessons? All extremes are bad, but complaining about giving money to people who are needed for society to exist just because you greedily want that money for you makes Stalin look good.

I want to create hands where a side has the bidding to themselves whether to play a part-score or a game or a slam, no overcalls from their opponents. I'll be using Dealmaster Pro, so what constraints would you recommend? Will I have to do 'em one by one, few by few? I need to create 36 such hands.

What if the first already played the second, the third, the fourth and the fifth? Would this make a difference? What if 2nd and 3rd were 1 VP away from each other? I really want to know if this has been done before in bridge swiss tournaments before.

I agree with 2NT but I'd prefer 3♥ by South instead of Pass. If North is awake s/he'll bid 4.

All red, bidding goes: 2♥* 2♠ 3♣* Pa Pa 3♥ Pa ??? Where 2♥ shows 5♥ and 4+ in a minor, clubs in this case (3♣ was P/C), What is your bid now? What does partner's 3♥ (at this point) show? You hold: ♠xx ♥KQJxxx ♦Jxx ♣xx

You hold: ♠Kxxx ♥Txx ♦Txxx ♣xx All Red, bidding goes: 1♦ X 3♣* Pa Pa X Pa 3♠ 4♣ X Pa ??? 3♣ was weak, it's a Swiss tournament, next to last round, second table.

At the last round of a Swiss Event the leading team is so far ahead that even losing 25-0 in the last match they would still win the tournament. Is it correct to have that first team play the first team which cannot possibly finish in the prize-winning zone? Is it fair to have the normal pairing 1st vs 2nd and so on? The Gibsonizing thing comes from Scrabble tourneys, is there such a figure in Bridge or other sports? Any links related to bridge?

w vs w, last round of a Swiss teams, playing for the second place (nothing of this really matters...), you hold: ♠ATxx ♥xx ♦AJxxxx ♣x Bidding goes: 2♦* Pass 2♠* 3♦ Pass ??? 2♦ is multi (weak in a Major, strong in NT) and 2♠ means P/C with preference to hearts. 3♦ by partner is natural. What do you bid?

Maybe that's the problem, there are no pubs in America but bars.

I'm very tempted to pass. If I bid 4♦ I'll have to continue bidding diamonds over everything partner bids. I doubt the auction will finish here so I pass.

Well, you don't need bar-coded cards, so in the long run I don't think they're more expensive.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2009/03/...7054871449.html I remember this movie where Keanu Reeves had an implant in his brain which allowed him to store information, sort of a hard drive. One of these days they're gonna be able to have the brain access information in drives and then they'll have to be prohibited in bridge tournaments.

You no longer need bar-coded cards with the new dealing machines.

Partner has either a very bad hand (and RHO trap-passed) or he has diamonds and will be happy about our double. If RHO trap-passed I don't think we'll be too many downs playing at the 2 level (if we play at the three level 'cause partner has clubs great, if partner jumps...). I just double and see what developes.

I understand this logic when you have a sure trick. But I guess in this case you just imagine that your partner has an Ace (because they didn't keep trying for seven?) and lead 'for' him. Am I right? I'm just trying to compare this situation to Frances' Poll. I chose a spade lead there and a heart lead here. I know both were sort of passive but I wasn't sure about the thought process behind them.

♠J should be the lead, regardless of the result.

I can't believe what you're saying, can someone confirm/deny this?

How is a spade canonical? What's the thought process behind it?

Why didn't your partner bid 3NT? I wonder if with such a lousy club suit a 1NT rebid might have been better. I was the only one who bid 3♠ from here so we can play together and get to terrible contracts...

Even bad publicity can be good publicity. I found the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEkm5UnfoXY&feature=related They mention the game but never actually 'play it'. At least the mention it so I figure it's a win!

Is being poor or ugly the reason why I didn't get this? Does it have to do with religion? Could it be cultural? Is there a link to 'yesterday's 'How I Met Your Mother' episode?

I'd certainly double on the first and third but wouldn't on the second. My partners always bid my 2-card suits in these situations.